MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123523100

The Instability of Family Earnings and Family Income in Canada, 1986 to 1991 and 1996 to 2001

2005· preprint· en· W3123523100 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
René Morissette, Yuri Ostrovsky

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2005
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarningsUnemploymentDemographic economicsEconomicsTransfer paymentDistribution (mathematics)Family incomeLabour economicsEconomic growthFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate how family earnings instability evolved between the late 1980s and the late 1990s and how family income instability varies across segments of the (family-level) earnings distribution. We uncover four key patterns. First, among the subset of families who were intact over the 1982­91 and 1992­2001 periods, family earnings instability changed little between the late 1980s and the late 1990s. Second, the dispersion of families' permanent earnings became much more unequal during that period. Third, families who were in the bottom tertile of the (age-specific) earnings distribution in 1992 to 1995 had, during the 1996­2001 period, much more unstable market income than their counterparts in the top tertile. Fourth, among families with husbands aged under 45, the tax and transfer system, during the 1996­2001 period, eliminated at least two-thirds (and up to all) of the differences in instability (measured in terms of proportional income gains/losses) in family market income that were observed during that period between families in the bottom tertile and those in the top tertile. This finding highlights the key stabilization role played by the tax and transfer system, a feature that received relatively little attention during the 1990s when (UI) EI and Social Assistance were reformed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207